Blood-alcohol level feedback: A failure to deter impaired driving.

Russ, Nason W.; Geller, E. Scott; Leland, Louis S.

doi:10.1037/0893-164x.2.3.124

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Providing drinkers with information regarding their own BrAC immediately before driving has not been shown to be an effective deterrent of driving under the influence of alcohol (Russ et al, 1989). However, the present results suggest that providing drivers with explicit information regarding the amount of alcohol they have consumed may have other beneficial functions.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 67%

Differential effects of alcohol and alcohol expectancy on risk‐taking during simulated driving

Burian¹,

Hensberry²,

Liguori³

2003

Human Psychopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the separate and combined effects of alcohol (0.0 or 0.5 g/kg) and alcohol expectancies (none or 2-3 standard drinks) on risk-taking using a simulated-driving lane choice task. In this task, risk-taking was operationalized as choosing a cone-defined lane with a higher relative probability of hitting a cone. When alcohol was received but not expected, the probability of a risky lane choice increased compared with when alcohol was neither expected nor received. However, when subjects both expected and received alcohol, the probability of a risky lane choice was significantly decreased compared with when alcohol was neither expected nor received. These findings suggest that the knowledge of dose received can differentially influence the pharmacological effect of alcohol on decision-making.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 67%

Differential effects of alcohol and alcohol expectancy on risk‐taking during simulated driving

Burian¹,

Hensberry²,

Liguori³

2003

Human Psychopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While most studies agree that alcohol consumption is associated with risky behavioral patterns like dangerous driving (Burian et al 2003;Russ et al 1988;Beirness1987),riskysexualbehavior(Halpern-Felsheretal.1996Cooper2002)and violence(EnsorandGodfrey1993;Lauetal.1995;RichardsonandBudd2003),there isnoconsensusonexactlyhowalcoholinfluencesanindividual'swillingnesstotake risks.Ontheonehand,itisstillunclearwhethertheresultingriskybehaviorsafter alcoholic exposure are due to an enhanced preference for riskier choices in concomitance with the impaired ability to perceive risks and/or to evaluate the possible negative consequences associated with those behaviors (Lane et al 2004;Kyngdon and Dickerson 1999;Euser et al 2011;Fromme et al 1997;George et al 2005). On the other hand, we still do not know whether it is only the pharmacological effect of alcohol intake or also a psychological component which influencesalcohol-relatedriskybehaviors.Sofartheroleofimportantpsychological factors around the alcohol-risk relationship remains surprisingly unexplored.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The separate effects of self-estimated and actual alcohol intoxication on risk taking: A field experiment.

Proestakis¹,

Espín

Exadaktylos

et al. 2013

Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many risky actions are carried out under the influence of alcohol. However, the effect of alcoholicintoxicationoverthewillingnesstotakerisksiscomplexandstillremainsunclear.Weconductaneconomicfieldexperimentinanatural,drinkingandrisk-takingenvironment to analyze how both actual and self-estimated blood alcohol concentration (BAC) levels influencesubjects'choicesovermonetarylotteries.Ourresultsrevealanegativeimpactof both actual and self-estimated BAC levels on risk-taking. However, for male and young subjects, we find a positive relationship between BAC underestimation (a pattern of estimation error which mainly occurs at high BAC levels) and the willingness to choose riskierlotteries.Ourfindingssuggestthatariskcompensationmechanismisactivatedonly when individuals' own intoxication level is consciously self-perceived to be high. We concludethereforethathumanpropensitytoengageinriskyactivitiesundertheinfluence of alcohol is not due to an enhanced preference for risky choices. In addition to the suggestion in the existing literature that such propensity is due to a weakened ability to perceiverisks,ourresultsindicatethatanimpairedself-perceptionofownintoxicationlevel mayalsobeanimportantfactor.

show abstract

“…At the conclusion of each interview, the participant's BrAC was measured using a handheld alcohol breath testing instrument (Alco-Sensor IV). Participants were not informed of their exact BrAC reading because of concerns that some might continue drinking if they perceived themselves to be at a low level of intoxication (Russ et al, 1988). "Walk-away" cards containing information about the principal investigator, the university's institutional review board, transportation services, and local resources for help with an alcohol problem were provided to all participants.…”

Section: Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Breath Alcohol Concentrations of Designated Drivers

Barry

Chaney

Stellefson

2013

J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Objective: This study established breath alcohol concentrations (BrACs) and alcohol-related behaviors of designated drivers (DDs) to determine (a) whether DDs are abstaining from drinking, (b) whether alcohol-related behaviors of non-DDs and DDs were different, and (c) whether the alcohol consumption of DDs resulted in BrAC levels that affected driving performance or caused psychomotor impairment. Method: We conducted six anonymous fi eld studies during a 3-month period in a southeastern college community restaurant and bar district. Intercept interviews were conducted with 1,071 bar patrons. Alcoholrelated behaviors, BrAC, and whether one was serving as a DD were measured. The sample was primarily White (72.7%), male (62.4%) college students (64.7%). Descriptive statistics and an independent sample t test compared the BrACs of DDs versus non-DDs. A one-way analysis of variance examined the differences in the alcohol-related behaviors (Alcohol Use Disorders Identifi cation Test-consumption [AUDIT-C] score) across DDs abstaining from drinking (BrAC = .00 g/210 L), drinking DDs (BrACs ≥ .02 and < .05 g/210 L), and impaired DDs (BrACs ≥ .05 g/210 L). A logistic regression assessed the impact of alcohol-related behaviors (AUDIT-C) on whether one was serving as a DD. Results: Of the 165 DDs, approximately 40% did not abstain from drinking. Approximately 17% of DDs had BrACs between .02 g/210 L and .049 g/210 L, whereas 18% recorded BrACs at .05 g/210 L or greater. The mean AUDIT-C score for impaired DDs signifi cantly differed from both abstaining DDs and drinking DDs. Participants with greater AUDIT-C scores were more likely to serve as a DD and have a BrAC that signifi cantly inhibited driving ability and psychomotor function. Conclusions: These fi ndings identify the need for consensus across researcher, layperson, and communication campaigns that a DD must be someone who has abstained from drinking entirely. (J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs, 74, 509-513, 2013)

show abstract

Blood-alcohol level feedback: A failure to deter impaired driving.

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Differential effects of alcohol and alcohol expectancy on risk‐taking during simulated driving

Differential effects of alcohol and alcohol expectancy on risk‐taking during simulated driving

The separate effects of self-estimated and actual alcohol intoxication on risk taking: A field experiment.

Breath Alcohol Concentrations of Designated Drivers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About